Ultrasound in cervical traumatic neuromas after neck dissection in thyroid carcinoma patients: descriptive analysis and diagnostic accuracy

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2023
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
SBEM-SOC BRASIL ENDOCRINOLOGIA & METABOLOGIA
Citação
ARCHIVES OF ENDOCRINOLOGY METABOLISM, v.67, n.5, 2023
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Objective: Cervical traumatic neuromas (CTNs) may appear after lateral neck dissection for metastatic thyroid carcinoma. If they are misdiagnosed as metastatic lymph nodes (LNs) in follow-up neck ultrasound (US), unnecessary and uncomfortable fine-needle aspiration biopsy are indicated. The present study aimed to describe US features of CTNs and to assess the US performance in distinguishing CTNs from abnormal LNs. Subjects and methods: Retrospective evaluation of neck US images of 206 consecutive patients who had lateral neck dissection as a part of thyroid cancer treatment to assess CTN's US features. Diagnostic accuracy study to evaluate US performance in distinguishing CTNs from abnormal LNs was performed. Results: Eight-six lateral neck nodules were selected for analysis: 38 CTNs and 48 abnormal LNs. CTNs with diagnostic cytology were predominantly hypoechogenic (100% vs. 45%; P = 0.008) and had shorter diameters than inconclusive cytology CTNs: short axis (0.39 cm vs. 0.50 cm; P = 0.03) and long axis (1.64 cm vs. 2.35 cm; P = 0.021). The US features with the best accuracy to distinguish CTNs from abnormal LNs were continuity with a nervous structure, hypoechogenic internal lines, short/long axis ratio = 0.42, absent Doppler vascularization, fusiform morphology, and short axis = 0.48 cm. Conclusion: US is a very useful method for assessing CTNs, with good performance in distinguishing CTNs from abnormal LNs.
Palavras-chave
Neuroma, ultrasonography, thyroid neoplasms, neck dissection
Referências
  1. Bianchi S, 2008, JOINT BONE SPINE, V75, P643, DOI 10.1016/j.jbspin.2008.07.002
  2. BURCHIEL KJ, 1993, J NEUROSURG, V78, P714, DOI 10.3171/jns.1993.78.5.0714
  3. Chammas MC, 2016, J CLIN ULTRASOUND, V44, P587, DOI 10.1002/jcu.22380
  4. CIESLAK AK, 1946, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V53, P646, DOI 10.1001/archsurg.1946.01230060657004
  5. Domeshek LF, 2017, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V139, P407, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003018
  6. Ha EJ, 2012, THYROID, V22, P820, DOI 10.1089/thy.2012.0092
  7. Ha EJ, 2011, THYROID, V21, P1385, DOI 10.1089/thy.2011.0207
  8. Haugen BR, 2016, THYROID, V26, P1, DOI 10.1089/thy.2015.0020
  9. Huang LF, 2000, AM J NEURORADIOL, V21, P1676
  10. Iida S, 1995, J Osaka Univ Dent Sch, V35, P1
  11. Kwak JY, 2009, J CLIN ULTRASOUND, V37, P189, DOI 10.1002/jcu.20566
  12. Leenhardt L, 2013, EUR THYROID J, V2, P147, DOI 10.1159/000354537
  13. Martinoli C, 2000, SEMIN ULTRASOUND CT, V21, P205, DOI 10.1016/S0887-2171(00)90043-X
  14. Miguel JP, 2003, DIRECCAO GERAL SAUDE
  15. SILVESTRI E, 1995, RADIOLOGY, V197, P291, DOI 10.1148/radiology.197.1.7568840
  16. Som PM, 2000, AM J ROENTGENOL, V174, P837, DOI 10.2214/ajr.174.3.1740837
  17. SUNDERLAND S, 1990, MUSCLE NERVE, V13, P771, DOI 10.1002/mus.880130903
  18. Sunderland S, 1978, NERVES NERVE INJURIE, P188
  19. Yabuuchi H, 2004, RADIOLOGY, V233, P523, DOI 10.1148/radiol.2331030779